News 
 National Rural News 
 Wool 
 General 
 AWGA has clip questions 

AWGA has clip questions

26 Jun, 2008 04:29 PM
The Australian Wool Exchange's proposed National Wool Declaration is flawed and must be changed immediately, according to the Australian Wool Growers Association.

Despite claims that AWEX has undertaken broad industry consultation, AWGA chairman Martin Oppenheimer says that AWGA was not involved at all in the development of this proposed declaration.

"There are significant flaws in this proposed National Wool Declaration, importantly relating to the definition of mulesing and the inclusion of clipped wool as unmulesed," Mr Oppenheimer said.

AWGA has three questions that it says must be answered:

1. Why is the AWEX definition of mulesing different to the gazetted National Code of Practice for the welfare of sheep?

2. Why is clipped wool included with unmulesed wool?

3. Why is Australian Wool Innovation (AWI) selling mulesing clips?

The gazetted National Code of Practice for the welfare of sheep is the official government and industry position on mulesing ( see www.publish.csiro.au/nid/22/pid/5 389.htm).

AWGA says that section 9.5 of the National Code of Practice has the definition of mulesing as "the removal of skin from part of the breech area", but in contrast the new AWEX definition is the "removal of skin from the tail and/or breech region of a sheep using shears".

AWGA suspects that the change of mulesing definition from the National Code of Practice by AWEX, to include "shears", came about under pressure from AWI to accommodate AWI’s research project clip mulesing technology.

"Unfortunately AWEX have made a major mistake with the inclusion of clipped wool with unmulesed wool, and may threaten the commercial value of this new market segment," Mr Oppenheimer said.

"Significant retailers have chosen not to accept clips, but how can they differentiate clipped wool from unmulesed wool now?

"AWI should get the mulesing clips to market via commercial partners, but not get involved in selling them.

"According to AWI the cost will be $1.50 to $2.00 per head for the plastic clips, with biodegradable clips expected to be more expensive. The commercial viability of this technology will be interesting."

Mr Oppenheimer said growers who protect their sheep with surgical mulesing are adopting pain relief at $0.63 per head for lifetime protection, and in the longer term are looking at breeding sheep that are less susceptible to breech strike.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Until many men with guns come over the hill i will continue to operate my farm as i see fit because it is my farm. YE-hah.
Posted by THE FARMER, 26/06/2008 4:39:08 PM
In my expert opinion the current method of surgical mulesing is less painful than the trialled clip alternative not to mention expense and environmental contamination. Whoever thought up these clips needs to be locked up with the Savannah cats proposer.
Posted by Common Cents, 27/06/2008 9:45:58 AM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
POLL
Q: What should the Federal Government do to relieve the cost of petrol?

Continue with its current approach
(4.2%)

Cut petrol excise by 5c/l
(1.6%)

Cut petrol excise by 10c/l
(29.9%)

Invest petrol revenue in alternative fuel research
(39%)

Mandate 10pc biofuel content in petrol
(13.3%)

Other
(11.9%)

Total Votes: 428
Poll Date: 23 June, 2008

Most popular articles

SPRAY AWARDS NEWS MREC



The Land







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...